Woman killed by the cure for her cancer

Patricia Roper had 30 years of health problems because of radiotherapy received in 1972, an inquest heard

A woman died from a 'delayed reaction' to the radiation treatment she received for breast cancer over 30 years ago, an inquest has heard.

Patricia Roper was given the all clear from the disease after four weeks of radiotherapy in 1972.

The cancer never returned but her body was left with massive scarring - both inside and out - from the treatment and in the years that followed her health deteriorated.

More here:

• Is your x-ray safe?

Medical experts yesterday told the hearing at Windsor Guildhall that the radiation ultimately caused her death last year, aged 69.

Consultant clinical oncologist Dr Jane Barrett said that Mrs Roper had been diagnosed with cancer of the left breast in 1971, when she was 34.

Following a mastectomy, she was given 'cutting edge' radiation therapy at Hammersmith Hospital in London.

She received doses of radiation in 20 instalments over four weeks - a standard course of treatment still common today.

But after a few months, Mrs Roper, from Bracknell in Berkshire, began showing an extreme reaction to the radiation, including a persistent cough, fractured ribs and scarring to the chest.

Within a decade her left hand had become semi-paralysed and by October last year her whole arm had to be amputated. She died three weeks later after suffering a severe haemorrhage.

Doctors later found scar tissue had spread all over her chest. It had fused her internal organs and there were areas of flesh that were beginning to die off as the blood supply failed.

Dr Barrett told the inquest: 'It is clear that the radiotherapy that Mrs Roper received in 1972 was the cause of all the symptoms she suffered over the past 30 years.'

The court heard that other women who were treated in the 1970s for breast cancer suffered similar damage to Mrs Roper but that few of them had lived as long.

Coroner Peter Bedford ruled that Mrs Roper died as a result of a delayed reaction to radiotherapy.

He said: 'One is almost shocked to hear that somebody should endure such a treatment when it is designed to help them overcome a disease.

'But I must bear in mind that the way in which radiotherapy was approached has now been refined.

'In 1971 the world was a different place and doctors felt that the important thing was to zap the cancer without much thought for the consequences for the patient afterwards.'

He said Mrs Roper had not been treated any differently to other patients at the time, but added: 'The consequences of what she had to endure do seem so unfair.' Her husband of 45 years, retired decorator Eric, said after the hearing that neither he nor his wife had blamed anyone for what happened to her.

'We thought radiation treatment was going to cure her and although it was excessive, they thought it was right at the time,' he said.

But yesterday campaigners fighting for compensation for patients with radiation-induced injuries hailed the verdict as a 'massive breakthrough'.

Jean McFarlane, from the pressure group Radiotherapy Action Group Exposure, said: 'The Government will only pay compensation for victims if radiation treatment is officially recorded as the cause of death.'

Michael Williams, Vice President of Royal College of Radiologists, added: 'Sadly, Mrs Roper was a very rare case of a patient who has an extreme reaction to radiotherapy.

'Research is currently under way to discover why these cases occur.'

He added that while the dosage Mrs Roper had received remained standard, the procedure had become more far more precise in the last thirty years.